I wasn't at the track today, myself, but my vast network of spies tells me that a BTW forum poster was leading the NTRA buyin contest after Day 1. Though I won't mention his name - don't want to jinx the boy.

Must be all luck, though, because nobody can pick at that track for real, due to the inscrutable race-to-race bias and all.

Best of continued luck in day 2, Mr. X. And all the ships at sea.

And oh yeah PS: Supposedly someone got the Pick 5 with carryover today as a single, and that was worth $3750? So let's see, contest every Saturday where $2500 is up for grabs, or petting zoo? Contest or petting zoo? Hmmm ... that's a tough one.

Let me preface this by saying, these aren't complaints, just my observations after playing a handful of contests.....

1. I have no problem with 2-entry contests, and even 3 is OK if they don't sell a person the 3rd entry until day-of contest and only if there are no more fresh entries out there.

2. Let's be real, none of these contests are necessarily true barometers of one's handicapping ability. Some contests are strictly equal WP bets on a single horse per race --- nobody truly bets like that while others say you must bet a certain percentage of your bankroll on each race, again not the way any real people I know bet.

3. Because there is a posted leader board, let's be honest, the last few races become "math contests" --- you know, like "I'm $50 behind the leader with two races to go, so which 20-1 horse that I don't really like do I hate the least, even though the 9-2 horse is the one I'd really play if this was real money". I did that in a contest a couple of years ago at Hoosier and hit a bomber on the Turf at Calder that I wouldn't have played with your money (I wouldn't have touched the race with a 10-foot pole in real life but it was a "mandatory" race). So I found myself in good shape heading into the last race but another bomber hit and someone jumped from like 30th into the top 4 to knock me out of a "Vegas" posiition. I did win like $100 for finishing 10th.

4. I know it would be unfair and never work, but I 'd love to not have a leader board so we could truly see how people would play if they had no idea how the next guy was doing. You know, everyone plays their 20 races and after the last race, you run the totals, most money wins (or most winners win, depending on format).

Anyway, good luck to all, I'm on the sidelines for this one but I'm probably playing the Kee contest next weekend.

1. I have no problem with 2-entry contests, and even 3 is OK if they don't sell a person the 3rd entry until day-of contest and only if there are no more fresh entries out there.

Me neither. If you think you can't compete with a person with two entries, buy two yourself. If you won't because you don't want to risk $200 instead of $100, then you really don't have a lot of faith in your chances to win that contest anyhow, do you?

Quote

4. I know it would be unfair and never work, but I 'd love to not have a leader board so we could truly see how people would play if they had no idea how the next guy was doing. You know, everyone plays their 20 races and after the last race, you run the totals, most money wins (or most winners win, depending on format).

Have to disagree here. The leader board is 80% of the fun in these things, IMHO.

As I said Terry, I know the "no leader board" idea would never work, nor is it fair to those who shelled out $100 or more to play in a contest, it's just that I would be curious to see how a contest would play out if one had to rely solely on his or her own smarts to win, not figuring out how much he or she needs to bet to catch up (a la final Jeopardy).

As I said, I cashed in that Hoosier contest a few years ago based solely on taking a flyer on a) a race that I only played becasue it was a mandatory race and b) a horse that I figured had a modicum more of a chance than the other 'no chance' horses in a race where the 9-2 runner looked much the best to me on paper, and would have been my bet had I not been so far behind.

I wasn't at the track today, myself, but my vast network of spies tells me that a BTW forum poster was leading the NTRA buyin contest after Day 1. Though I won't mention his name - don't want to jinx the boy.

Must be all luck, though, because nobody can pick at that track for real, due to the inscrutable race-to-race bias and all.

Best of continued luck in day 2, Mr. X. And all the ships at sea.

And oh yeah PS: Supposedly someone got the Pick 5 with carryover today as a single, and that was worth $3750? So let's see, contest every Saturday where $2500 is up for grabs, or petting zoo? Contest or petting zoo? Hmmm ... that's a tough one.

I would hope we have some well-rounded people on this site whose only form of entertainment is not just betting on horses. When I go to the track (4-6 a month) I find it quite sad to always see the same "bust-outs" cursing every time they lose. These people need to start living in the real world instead of some gambling universe shell.

A trip to Brookfield zoo might actually help some of these hard-core gambler types get a fresh perspective on their lives and how they might just enjoy other activities besides betting at the track. I love Brookfield Zoo, me and my girlfriend get Season Passes every year.

Brookfield Zoo is probably only 15 minutes from Hawthorne, maybe the horseplayer can do both in the same day - anyhow it could be start in the right direction for some of these poor lost souls..............

I think Terry was refering to what is better track marketing --- spending $2,500 in prize money each week to have a Pick 4 contest, plus whatever it costs Hawthorne in hard dollars to have the weekly buy-in contests vs. Arlington spending whatever it costs for them to have a petting zoo for people to bring their kiddies to the track in the summer.

I think Terry was refering to what is better track marketing --- spending $2,500 in prize money each week to have a Pick 4 contest, plus whatever it costs Hawthorne in hard dollars to have the weekly buy-in contests vs. Arlington spending whatever it costs for them to have a petting zoo for people to bring their kiddies to the track in the summer.

I see the merits of both approaches.

I was referring to what gets me personally - an existing, betting racing customer - interested in going out to the track and playing the live card, especially on days when there's kind of a crummy racing card, which happens all too often at both tracks. As opposed to staying home and/or doing something else, or going to an OTB to play NYRA, or playing something via the Internet. But being fair, it doesn't seem like these things really pack the house at Hawthorne.

Maybe the petting zoo gets Buffy, Biff, and all their little Dakotas and Katelyns out to AP on Sunday, and that's who they really want as customers. It seems like their plan is to engage the casual Coke and hotdog buyers, and let the "regulars" fend for themselves once they've paid their $6, even in the face of so many new forms of competition. And they do get the attendance, though obviously handle isn't all it could be, or they wouldn't need slots to survive.

robertv I assure you I do more than go to the track. Don't fret yourself about my cultural developmental activities.

well no surprise once again when something negative is said about the thorne somebody steps up to defend LOL.legitimate beef? ok first off this was a qualifier was it not? how many entries do you get in vegas? 1 if im correct, obviously meaning no advantages are held over your opponent so why should their be advantages in the qualifying round? if they wanted to up the ante to200-300 bucks per person and everyone would have only1 entry id have no problem playing as long as the playingfield was level for everyone!

Not that "just because everyone is doing it makes it OK" but I am not aware of any qualifiers that allow only one entry. AP allows two, the AP-OTBs allowed two, Keeneland and Turfway, both of which I am playing in, allow more than 1, NYRA as far as I recall allows more than one, and I am sure there are others.

If you choose to only play in tournaments that allow only one entry per person, more power to you, but your pickings are going to be slim.

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean he or she is defending "tha thorne", as you call in the place in your 20-something-speak.

if they wanted to up the ante to200-300 bucks per person and everyone would have only1 entry id have no problem playing as long as the playingfield was level for everyone!

The playing field was level for everyone. Everyone could buy 2 entries. Those that chose to buy only one hurt themselves.

It takes time and money to play these contests as well as skill. I could have been cheap and not bought two entries and would have probably lost. I could have chosen not to spend $50 on Thorograph sheets and I would have definitely lost. I could have chosen to sit in my seat all day and chat with friends instead of walking down to the paddock for all 18 races, but I didn't. I took the effort to inspect every horse on the card for two days. The rules were the same for everyone.

As for someone not being able to afford two, well... it happens. Everyone has a limit on what they can spend. I'd love to fly to Vegas and buy three $1,000 entries into the Orleans contest but I can't afford that. It doesn't make the playing field of their contest uneven.

On second thought, I probably could have been able to enter the Orleans contest but my wife already spent the Hawthorne prize money.

By the same token, I've seen many a smart player tangle themselves up by having multiple entries. You know, "I had that 15-1 horse on my 'second' entry but if I had put it on my main entry, I would have won."

And as far as sheets and stuff, I never have done it and never will --- and I do pretty well for myself and I don't really bet enough to justify the expense.

I'm a trip and class handicapper who believes you can explain away a bad race with the bounce factor, but can't predict it --- after all, horses are people, too.

183 posts speaks volumes of your "cultural development" - hey but we all are free to make our own choices in life.

Anyhow, I've always felt AP and HAW both have their own strengths and weaknesses,I enjoy going to both tracks. For me it ultimately it comes down to handicapping,betting,and winning - it matters very little where the winning occurs.

Excuses for people losing at the track are the backbone of this forum. So lets seefamilies have their kids at the track, there are pony rides and live bands - this is why you lose?

I've never/ever have had any trouble "fending" for myself at any racetrack (including AP) - it really is not too hard to find a betting window at a racetrack, now is it. Correct me if I'm wrongCT - you do go to the track to bet on the horses right?

183 posts speaks volumes of your "cultural development" - hey but we all are free to make our own choices in life.

LOL! That's nothing. Check out some of the guys on the harness forum.

Nevertheless, the subject you brought up was doing something besides going to the track.

Quote

Excuses for people losing at the track are the backbone of this forum. So lets see families have their kids at the track, there are pony rides and live bands - this is why you lose?

No one said anything like that except you. You might want to ask your hero John Frank about that. He is the one who complains about those.

Quote

I've never/ever have had any trouble "fending" for myself at any racetrack (including AP) - it really is not too hard to find a betting window at a racetrack, now is it. Correct me if I'm wrong CT - you do go to the track to bet on the horses right?

Yes, when I like the card and go to the track that's primarily why I go, and I fend for myself just fine. Sometimes I go to the track primarily to play in a contest, and betting comes 2nd or only equal. Sometimes I go primarily because something else player-oriented is happening. But I never go because the petting zoo is up and running.

The discussion was about things to attract people to the track on days maybe they wouldn't go otherwise because the cards aren't so great. Hawthorne tries extra things to attract horseplayers to their track and bet the live Illinois races, including a meaningful rewards program. Arlington does not seem to, instead choosing to try and attract families and people like APCD Dan who just like to bask in the sun. It doesn't mean either is right or wrong, except that I know which is right for me.

Do you follow now? Or does it not even matter, and you're just in the mood for some confrontational posting?

well no surprise once again when something negative is said about the thorne somebody steps up to defend LOL.legitimate beef? ok first off this was a qualifier was it not? how many entries do you get in vegas? 1 if im correct, obviously meaning no advantages are held over your opponent so why should their be advantages in the qualifying round? if they wanted to up the ante to200-300 bucks per person and everyone would have only1 entry id have no problem playing as long as the playingfield was level for everyone!

You ducked the question entirely, Ashton: have you ever done well enough in a contest with a single entry that you would have won had you not been beaten by someone with multiple entries? If not...well, you are just pissin' and moaning about nothing, and your excuse for not entering the contest is merely a paper tiger -- that was my point. Hawthorne needed no defense from your weak argument.

You ducked the question entirely, Ashton: have you ever done well enough in a contest with a single entry that you would have won had you not been beaten by someone with multiple entries? If not...well, you are just pissin' and moaning about nothing, and your excuse for not entering the contest is merely a paper tiger -- that was my point. Hawthorne needed no defense from your weak argument.

I think John considers himself more of a horseman than a gambler. His interest seems to be more with the horses, trainers, and jockeys. Like me, John seems to bring out the inferiority complex in the Hawthorne supporters, who then reply with mean-spirited comments like the above. John (Ashton) and I both seem to have more of a love for the industry and how it works, than the gambling end. Be nice to him, we don't have that many young people interested in this business anymore.

I think John considers himself more of a horseman than a gambler. His interest seems to be more with the horses, trainers, and jockeys. Like me, John seems to bring out the inferiority complex in the Hawthorne supporters, who then reply with mean-spirited comments like the above. John (Ashton) and I both seem to have more of a love for the industry and how it works, than the gambling end. Be nice to him, we don't have that many young people interested in this business anymore.

Dan, either you can't read for comprehension, or you are deliberately fanning the flames of the pro vs. anti-Hawthorne debate in the most specious way imaginable. This isn't about Hawthorne, per se, and once again: Hawthorne needs no defense here; as others have pointed out -- had you read any of the other replies besides mine -- other venues, including your beloved Arlington Park, have hosted tournaments in which multiple entries were allowed.

Ashton (or John, you say) said he wouldn't compete in a tournament that allowed multiple entries, claiming that multiple entries made for an un-level playing field.

I retorted that the complaint might be valid if he had done well enough in one of these contests to win, save for being beaten by someone who purchased multiple entries.

Point. Counterpoint. It's called debate, Dan, and it isn't necessarily indicative of mean-spiritedness or an inferiority complex to call someone on a comment they made on an Internet forum.

Nor is it mean-spirited for me to take you to task for your ill-informed attack on me -- I'd expect better from a retired school teacher. Pretty weak sauce, IMO.